TY - CHAP
T1 - Opening remarks
AU - Mattila, Lasse
PY - 1999
Y1 - 1999
N2 - It is a great pleasure to me on behalf of the Technical
Research Centre of Finland, VTT, to welcome you to
Finland and Espoo. VTT's main campus in Otaniemi is only
some three kilometres from here. In Otaniemi, VTT works
in close co-operation with the Helsinki University of
Technology, the largest of its kind in Finland. There are
also several specialised research institutes and
high-technology companies located in Otaniemi area.
VTT employs some 2700 people, almost 60 % having a
university degree. There has never been any dedicated
nuclear research centre in Finland. However, nuclear
energy research is an important part of VTT's activities
and is closely coupled with other applications. We
operate nowadays as a concern of nine quite independent
research institutes. Indeed, six out these nine
institutes are now regularly involved in nuclear R&D or
provide services for the nuclear industry in Finland and
abroad.
In several areas, nuclear applications have been the
driving force when VTT has developed new capabilities,
with important spin-off effects. Simulation of dynamic
industrial process systems is certainly one of the best
examples in this respect, Fig. 1. In early 1970's,
immediately after nuclear power plants were ordered in
Finland, we started to carry out accident analyses, with
the first versions of the RELAP code, for example.
Analogue simulators were built already in the late
sixties, followed by hybrid simulators in seventies. We
also had an important role in the building of the
full-scope training simulator commissioned in 1980 for
the Loviisa NPR. In 1980's we started to look at the
simulation of combustion power plants and in recent years
we have had strong interest in paper mills, both areas
being very important for the Finnish industry.
We who are interested in the simulation of nuclear power
plants can also benefit of spinin from other areas of
technology. The huge progress in the computational fluid
dynamics, CFD, helps us to improve our thermal-hydraulic
modelling, and latest visualisation and virtual reality
techniques offer possibilities to enlarged scope of
simulation in training, in maintenance for example. Also,
simulators are very useful as test beds when we have to
modernise the I&C systems of nuclear power plants by
introducing programmable automation systems and new
control room features.
About ten years ago we draw the first version of a
picture illustrating the different numerical simulation
tools available for nuclear power plant design, safety
analysis and training, Fig. 2. At that time we had quite
distinct categories of sophisticated accident analysis
codes, fast-running simplified models for simulators and
some early attempts to combine fidelity and
comprehensiveness of the simulation in engineering
simulators. Today we can draw a quite different picture,
Fig. 3. The boundaries have almost vanished. Current
computers allow the use of highly sophisticated models
even in real- time applications and CRT based control
rooms are eliminating the major difference between
training simulators and plant analyzers. The major
difference between a training simulator and a plant
analyzer can be that the models of the analyzer must be
very flexible and easy to modify.
However, if training does not take all the capacity of a
modem simulator, it can very well serve as a plant
analyzer too. We have a lot of experience in this
respect: VTT's researchers have spent many nights and
weekends at the Loviisa training simulator. A strong
current trend is the need for more efficient use of plant
analyzers: users are no more supposed to be experts in
computer and simulation technology, they should be
allowed to concentrate on understanding the process being
studied.
The first CSNI specialist meeting on simulators and
analyzers in summer 1992 attracted 86 participants from
12 countries. In this second meeting, we have 92
participants from 17 countries. This certainly indicates
a real need to gather around this theme. In addition to
the large number of countries present, these meetings
have another distinct, very valuable character: the
participants come from virtually all types of
organisations involved in the nuclear power business.
From the NEA viewpoint, we bring together experts working
in several principal working groups of the CSNI.
AB - It is a great pleasure to me on behalf of the Technical
Research Centre of Finland, VTT, to welcome you to
Finland and Espoo. VTT's main campus in Otaniemi is only
some three kilometres from here. In Otaniemi, VTT works
in close co-operation with the Helsinki University of
Technology, the largest of its kind in Finland. There are
also several specialised research institutes and
high-technology companies located in Otaniemi area.
VTT employs some 2700 people, almost 60 % having a
university degree. There has never been any dedicated
nuclear research centre in Finland. However, nuclear
energy research is an important part of VTT's activities
and is closely coupled with other applications. We
operate nowadays as a concern of nine quite independent
research institutes. Indeed, six out these nine
institutes are now regularly involved in nuclear R&D or
provide services for the nuclear industry in Finland and
abroad.
In several areas, nuclear applications have been the
driving force when VTT has developed new capabilities,
with important spin-off effects. Simulation of dynamic
industrial process systems is certainly one of the best
examples in this respect, Fig. 1. In early 1970's,
immediately after nuclear power plants were ordered in
Finland, we started to carry out accident analyses, with
the first versions of the RELAP code, for example.
Analogue simulators were built already in the late
sixties, followed by hybrid simulators in seventies. We
also had an important role in the building of the
full-scope training simulator commissioned in 1980 for
the Loviisa NPR. In 1980's we started to look at the
simulation of combustion power plants and in recent years
we have had strong interest in paper mills, both areas
being very important for the Finnish industry.
We who are interested in the simulation of nuclear power
plants can also benefit of spinin from other areas of
technology. The huge progress in the computational fluid
dynamics, CFD, helps us to improve our thermal-hydraulic
modelling, and latest visualisation and virtual reality
techniques offer possibilities to enlarged scope of
simulation in training, in maintenance for example. Also,
simulators are very useful as test beds when we have to
modernise the I&C systems of nuclear power plants by
introducing programmable automation systems and new
control room features.
About ten years ago we draw the first version of a
picture illustrating the different numerical simulation
tools available for nuclear power plant design, safety
analysis and training, Fig. 2. At that time we had quite
distinct categories of sophisticated accident analysis
codes, fast-running simplified models for simulators and
some early attempts to combine fidelity and
comprehensiveness of the simulation in engineering
simulators. Today we can draw a quite different picture,
Fig. 3. The boundaries have almost vanished. Current
computers allow the use of highly sophisticated models
even in real- time applications and CRT based control
rooms are eliminating the major difference between
training simulators and plant analyzers. The major
difference between a training simulator and a plant
analyzer can be that the models of the analyzer must be
very flexible and easy to modify.
However, if training does not take all the capacity of a
modem simulator, it can very well serve as a plant
analyzer too. We have a lot of experience in this
respect: VTT's researchers have spent many nights and
weekends at the Loviisa training simulator. A strong
current trend is the need for more efficient use of plant
analyzers: users are no more supposed to be experts in
computer and simulation technology, they should be
allowed to concentrate on understanding the process being
studied.
The first CSNI specialist meeting on simulators and
analyzers in summer 1992 attracted 86 participants from
12 countries. In this second meeting, we have 92
participants from 17 countries. This certainly indicates
a real need to gather around this theme. In addition to
the large number of countries present, these meetings
have another distinct, very valuable character: the
participants come from virtually all types of
organisations involved in the nuclear power business.
From the NEA viewpoint, we bring together experts working
in several principal working groups of the CSNI.
M3 - Other book part
SN - 951-38-5269-5
T3 - VTT Symposium
SP - 27
EP - 31
BT - Proceedings of the 2nd CSNI Specialist Meeting on Simulators and Plant Analysers
PB - VTT Technical Research Centre of Finland
CY - Espoo
T2 - 2nd CSNI Specialist Meeting on Simulators and Plant Analysers
Y2 - 29 September 1997 through 2 October 1997
ER -